The Congressional Appropriations process continues to move forward this week in Washington.  The House and Senate Appropriations Committees passed their FY2017 Interior and Environment spending bills, which funds the Department of the Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Forest Service.  The House and Senate measures include full funding for Federal Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILT) payments to counties at $480 million.  This level of funding represents a slight change in policy for the Senate as last year the Senate Appropriations Committee chose not to fund Federal PILT in the Senate bill, though funding was ultimately included in the year-end spending agreement negotiated with the President.  

The FY2017 Interior and Environment bills also include the perennial policy rider that bans the EPA from implementing the Clean Water Rule.  As in years past, however, the controversial language is anticipated to be negotiated out of any final spending agreement with the President.  The rule is currently stayed by the 6th Circuit Court and will likely remain unchanged through the end of the year as the court has set a September deadline for briefs and motions related to the case.  Also, included under the EPA section of the bills is the inclusion of additional funds for the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund and the Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund which helps communities fund water infrastructure projects.  The Senate bill would fund the programs at a combined $2.37 billion, an increase from last year’s funding of $113 million. The House bill proposes to fund the programs at $2.1 billion with additional funds only included for drinking water projects.

The U.S. Forest Service would continue levels close to current funding under the competing proposals.  The House would fund fire suppression at 100% of anticipated costs while the Senate would fund the suppression accounts at about 115%.  Interestingly, the Senate bill includes language to allow the Forest Service access to disaster funds for suppression needs but only after fully expending appropriated funds, a policy which has been advocated by RCRC and would prevent “fire borrowing.”  Giving the agency access to emergency funds for unanticipated suppression needs allows the agency to keep forest restoration and hazardous fuels reduction accounts whole so the work to prevent wildfires can be completed.

Possible floor consideration for either bill is uncertain at this time.